Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Is Oracle Getting Ready To Kill Unbreakable Linux?

Filed under
Linux

People outside of IT seldom think of Oracle as a Linux company, probably because it isn't. Oracle has always been considered a database and application company. Their main bread and butter is the Oracle database (currently at version 11g), and the application products they have acquired through PeopleSoft, BEA Systems, and other companies. They also offer a product called Oracle Unbreakable Linux (a clone of Red Hat Enterprise Linux), but it has never achieved the wide market share that Red Hat currently enjoys. So now that Oracle owns their own operating system in the free and clear, what benefits do they gain from maintaining Unbreakable Linux? The answer is probably: "Not much".

Oracle Unbreakable Linux was originally designed to be a Linux distribution backed by Oracle's support group, which is considered superior to the support offered by Red Hat. It gives their enterprise customers a better sense of security knowing that they can get operating system and database support from a single vendor. It also provides a platform for Oracle contributions to Linux. Oracle has contributed improvements to libstdc++, NFS, ext3, and they are the original creators of the Btrfs filesystem. Those contributions are being made to ensure that Oracle runs great on Linux. But while they contribute a lot of code, they don't actually own the Linux kernel. Every Linux distributor can use Oracle's contributions, and the only true benefit Unbreakable Linux offers is their support package.

But now that Oracle has acquired Sun, the landscape has changed.




More in Tux Machines

today's howtos

Leftovers: OSS

  • GitHub Visualizes the Impact of Open Source
    Code repository GitHub published data visualizations that show the impact of open source development on hosted projects, along with the "shape" of project activity. The visualizations emphasize the effect of teamwork, collaboration and communication that reinforce coding efforts.
  • Meet Codemoji: Mozilla’s New Game for Teaching Encryption Basics with Emoji
    The above message may seem like a random string of emoji. But not so: When decoded, it reads: “Encryption Matters.” Today, Mozilla is launching Codemoji, a fun, educational tool that introduces everyday Internet users to ciphers — the basic building blocks of encryption — using emoji.
  • DSS, Inc. Releases New Version of Open Source EHR, vxVistA, to Healthcare IT Community
  • GuixSD system tests
  • Self-driving cars and open source - what about GPLv3 and anti-tivoization?
    Primarily, the car manufacturers say that their dislike of the GPLv3 software is due to security issues. According to them, it should not be possible for the car owners to modify the software of the car because this could lead to exposing the users themselves and other road users to danger. In the light of the above, is seems reasonable to question whether security considerations is actually the true reason for the car manufacturers not wanting the users to run their own software on the cars’ hardware. For many years, car owners have replaced parts of their cars, e.g. tires, brakes and even software – which is supported by the car industry. To give an example, there is a large market for the replacement or modification (“remapping”) of the Engine Control Units (“ECU”) software of cars. The ECU’s are computers that control the car’s engine, including fuel mix, fuel supply and gearing. The car industry takes advice and uses data from companies which offer ECU remapping and thereby indirectly supporting the companies although – according to the car industry – changes to the engine allegedly can pose a security risk. Another aspect of the matter is that stating that the clause in GPLv3 absolutely prohibits the car fabricants from forbidding the users running their own software on the hardware of the cars is not completely true. Section 7 of GPLv3 makes it possible for the creators of GPL programs to give the car factories an extra license under which it is possible to use the GPLv3 software in their cars without having to comply with the former-mentioned obligation to provide the installation information to the users of the cars. The way the system works now, the car industry allows modifications of cars which may cause a loss of security. It is possible to develop GPLv3 software that the car fabricants can use without having to allow the car owners modifications. Furthermore, it is only GPLv3 – and therefore not other FOSS licenses – which on a general level forces the car manufacturers to allow modifications of their software. The question of the security level of the cars should hardly be a hindrance to the use of FOSS in self-propelled cars. If the car fabricants could realize this, the many advantages of the freely-available source code could clear the way for the technology generally being adopted faster.
  • Open Source: It’s Not Just About Software Anymore
    Open source is no longer just about the software that sits on your computer. Open methods are being used to develop everything from better automobiles to life altering medical devices.
  • Kickstarting open source steampunk clocks that use meters to tell the time
    Kyle writes, "The Volt is a fully open source, arduino-based, handmade analog clock that tells time with meters. Available in a DIY install kit, 2 pre-made models, and a mix & match hardware option. The clocks are but with solid black walnut and maple, with faceplates produced in brass, copper, and steel. Only on Kickstarter!"
  • Libarchive Security Flaw Discovered
    When it comes to security, everyone knows you shouldn't run executable files from an untrustworthy source. Back in the late 1990s, when web users were a little more naive, it was quite common to receive infected email messages with fake attachments.

More From Red Hat Summit

Android Leftovers